The Wish They Were All Dead Tory Cunt Thread

[Niall_Quinn]

I do wonder if this is all an elaborate scheme, the Trump administration just throws things out so fast it causes the media to get in a spin reporting on them, and then it misses the more relevant things.

I think there will have to come a point where the media stops reporting on what Trump himself says on Twitter etc, and confines itself to reporting on what his administration does.

Which is what the Trump administration is trying to force them to do. But they can't do that, can they? Because they aren't in it to report news, they are in it to protect the interests of a minority that Trump is now riding roughshod over. It's lose, lose for the fake press from hereon in.

[Letters]

I already read the article you have taken these talking points from. You have answered your own question and that answer is, stop being a repeater.

Are you talking to me? Which article? My points aren't from any one article.
I don't know why you have this strange view that my views are borrowed from other people while I presume you think yours are independently arrived at and entirely your own?
Everyone's views are based on what they see, read and hear. Stop pretending that yours are in some way original.

Just because there are news organisations which are privately run that doesn't make them accurate.
They will simply reflect the opinions of those individuals.

And yes, Trump is talking to his supporters directly, but he's lying. Constantly lying. And they're buying it, simply because he says it. You don't find that worrying?

You ask what I'm looking for in politicians? Honesty would be nice. Maybe that's too much to ask. But it would be nice to think that someone who has power to make decisions which can affect people's lives bases those decisions on information from a wide range of sources and does his or her best to ensure their accuracy. It doesn't really matter whether he won the electoral college by the widest margin ever or the slimmest, what matters is that he was told some incorrect information, repeated it and when told it was wrong just said "I dunno, that's just what I was told". It's an indication of how he thinks and it's not good enough. And if he does that with that information and the other examples I've given, he's going to base policy decisions on things which just aren't true. I don't know how you think that's a good thing.

Anywhere Muslims land ends up a shit hole, just a fact even if nobody wants to admit it.

You saying it's a fact doesn't make it one. And where is your evidence that Sweden is a "huge mess"?
You need to provide statistics and evidence, not empty rhetoric.

[Niall_Quinn]

Are you talking to me? Which article? My points aren't from any one article.
I don't know why you have this strange view that my views are borrowed from other people while I presume you think yours are independently arrived at and entirely your own?

Timing and sequence. It's transparent. I'll accept though, you may have obtained these talking points from various sources, not that it makes much difference due to the synchronisation between legacy media outlets.

[Niall_Quinn]

You saying it's a fact doesn't make it one. And where is your evidence that Sweden is a "huge mess"?

Sweden, Norway, France, Germany, Spain in particular. Just do a tiny bit of work would you? For your own benefit.

Please give an example of a Muslim state that is not a complete shit hole.

[Niall_Quinn]

Everyone's views are based on what they see, read and hear. Stop pretending that yours are in some way original.

No, not everyone. Some people use what they see, read, hear and then apply a thought process to those basic ingredients. I do this, but I am by no means unique. Anyone who wants to be informed does it. Those who want to be instructed do not.

[Niall_Quinn]

Just because there are news organisations which are privately run that doesn't make them accurate.
They will simply reflect the opinions of those individuals.

Completely irrelevant to the point I made. It is the overwhelming volume of information available from independent sources that allows for reflective sampling. It becomes self evident what is true and what is false the more sources you examine. Not just Internet based materials of course, but other traditional sources that have always been available such as books. Of course it's possible for everyone to be wrong, but not for long. Conversely, when you have a shrinking number of corporations dictating the legacy "news" with a view to upholding self interested agendas then the correlation between consolidation and reliability is closely related. All that maintains legacy fake news now is inertia, there is still a large body of people who believe what they see in the news is real because the legacy fake media is considered to be an official and authorised source. That's changing fast and will snap very quickly when the critical point is reached. Trump is doing a fine job ratcheting up the tension.

[Niall_Quinn]

You ask what I'm looking for in politicians? Honesty would be nice. Maybe that's too much to ask. But it would be nice to think that someone who has power to make decisions which can affect people's lives bases those decisions on information from a wide range of sources and does his or her best to ensure their accuracy. It doesn't really matter whether he won the electoral college by the widest margin ever or the slimmest, what matters is that he was told some incorrect information, repeated it and when told it was wrong just said "I dunno, that's just what I was told". It's an indication of how he thinks and it's not good enough. And if he does that with that information and the other examples I've given, he's going to base policy decisions on things which just aren't true. I don't know how you think that's a good thing.

Wilful or genuine ignorance on your part? Every president is coached, they call it briefing. Huge teams of bureaucrats gather information and collate it into digestible formats that allow presidents to get a mile high overview. The president then goes around the table of trusted advisors (trusted being a euphemism) and a position is developed. In most cases the position is political, what can they get away with, who will support them, who will protest, who do they need to pay off, who have they got dirt on, and so on.

OR... It's like on the West Wing where this friendly guy who knows everything and is intrinsically, morally unimpeachable makes unilateral decisions in the best interests of mankind.

You decide.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Which is what the Trump administration is trying to force them to do. But they can't do that, can they? Because they aren't in it to report news, they are in it to protect the interests of a minority that Trump is now riding roughshod over. It's lose, lose for the fake press from hereon in.

No he's just trying to promote his own narrative to his supporters and the media are foolishly acting like a megaphone for him.
You were right when you said his comments were directed at his base but if you think Trump is trying to make media reporting more honest? Sorry I don't see it, in fact he's demonstrably seeing them as a competitor to peddling his own lies.

[Niall_Quinn]

No he's just trying to promote his own narrative to his supporters and the media are foolishly acting like a megaphone for him.
You were right when you said his comments were directed at his base but if you think Trump is trying to make media reporting more honest? Sorry I don't see it, in fact he's demonstrably seeing them as a competitor to peddling his own lies.

So far Trump is far and away the most open and honest president in living memory. It's totally pointless denying this as the evidence speaks for itself. Of course he doesn't have much of a hurdle to leap in that respect. Nevertheless, he's standing out in front of the people he promised to represent and informing them in plain language how he's meeting that obligation. I can't think of any politician who has done this in my lifetime. It's a dangerous game. His supporters have become used to it so any wavering will quickly be seized upon and this time, if a political figure lets them down, there's no going back. This is the final chance for genuine representation, at least representation to whatever degree is possible in a cesspit like Washington DC.

All the bullshit about Trump is just that. First he was a joke candidate, they couldn't make that stick. Then he was a racist, followed by a misogynist, no dice. Then he was stupid. Evidently not. Currently he's a Russian agent. It just keeps getting more ridiculous. And all the while he's telling "lies", say the career liars. Even though it's serious, it's still very humorous.

I don't think he's trying to make the fake legacy media honest either. He can't do that, only they can. What he's doing is showing a growing number of people what they are. Just as importantly he's explaining to the old school power structures that he doesn't need them at all, which is really the bit they can't tolerate. The legacy media has played such a fundamentally and deeply damaging role at the heart of the decades of corruption we have suffered at the hands of the political stooge class. It's of course a great thing that a method has been found to expose and begin treating this deep seated problem. Why wouldn't it be? The smart guys who want to stay relevant will quickly figure out it is better to recover their professionalism and start doing a worthwhile job. The talking head pundits and puppet anchors will all be gone. How is that not good?

Then again, I doubt the globalists have played their last card and I wonder how far they might go to reestablish their authority? What I don't see is anyone standing behind Trump right now who can realistically take his place and carry on the progress.

People can do themselves a big favour by removing the filters and taking a look at what's happening here. Nobody has to like Trump or trust his end motives in order to see the shake up he's initiated is a bloody good thing. Is it "normality" that some people yearn for? Stuffed politicians who you know damn well are screwing you over, talking but saying nothing, grovelling to the media for a favourable piece? Another 8 years for the next Uncle Tom or Bush the Bomber? Is that what would make everyone more comfortable? Endless wars and the greatest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich in human history. Ah yes, the good old days.

[Letters]

Sweden, Norway, France, Germany, Spain in particular. Just do a tiny bit of work would you? For your own benefit.

Well, I've done some Googling on Sweden, as that's what we were discussing, and I could post links which both back up and refute your viewpoint.
Which is right? How would I know? How would you know? Do you live there? Have friends there?

Please give an example of a Muslim state that is not a complete shit hole.

I've never been to any so how would I know what they're like? How would you know? And how are you defining that anyway? People's opinions of places are by definition subjective.

How does it become self-evident what is true and what is false? I'm not clear how you think that works. If anything the multitude of sources has led to a proliferation of utter balls which is increasingly hard to pick through to determine what is accurate.
I see people sharing things on FB all the time, wringing their hands about things from multiple sources and the things just aren't true.

In a sense Trump IS open (in the sense that what he says isn't filtered, not even by his own brain) and honest (in the sense that I think he probably does believe a lot of what he says). But unfortunately a lot of things he believes just aren't true because he takes his information from a small sample of right-wing sources and doesn't fact check anything. When he's using that misinformation as the basis for his opinions and thus his policies it becomes dangerous.